The words that Jesus spoke “are spirit” and those words are “quick” (living) and powerful. John 6:63 (KJV) It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life. Hebrews 4:12 (KJV) For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
God had translators who were filled with the Holy Spirit and so came about His perfect one new man of a Bible, neither Hebrew/nor Greek. The original words were perfect in Hebrew and Greek and so is this Bible in English and it doesn’t return void. It’s an accurate, inspired translation and we should have eyes to see and ears to hear. Deep callers unto deep in the English Bible that connects both the old and new testaments: Hebrew and Greek perfectly and as majestically as it should.. It’s plain as day.
The KJV translators themselves were not part of the KJV only deception. They knew their work was not perfect, they said so themselves. So what makes the KJV only cultists think they know better than the translators? That is arrogance, pride, and willful ignorance. This rediculous idea that the KJV translators were somehow "inspired" . Therefore giving us a so called "perfect Bible in majestic English" is laughable if it was not such a dangerous deception. The fact that the KJV had thousands of footnotes, giving alternative readings, shows they were not inspired. Also the fact that there has been revisions at least ten. All of them different. Proof positive that the KJV is not inspired. If it was inspired. Why didn't Almighty God get it right the first time? KJV onlyism is an indefensible unbilical heresy. A man made tradition with no scriptural support. The archaic English where so many words have changed meaning, making it even more inaccurate. Archaic English that even the KJV only cultists do not speak. Exposing the double standards and hypocrisy of the KJV only deceivers. Meanwhile God is using and blessing the more accurate modern translations to bring many to Christ. True Bible believers who have not bowed the knee to the idolatrous KJV only deception.
@@henrylaurel1188 I ask these questions: If the Codices Vaticanus and Siniaiticus are the truer (or more perfect) Word of God, why were they hidden for so long? How does God not allow those from the 3rd century to the 1800s to haver these words that were not used or found until that time? If God did hide His word for preservation, then can we assume that those who believed were Christians, including Calvin and Arminius, are heretics? Why do we need 150 new translations, including over 70 in the last sixty years? Each one needs to be at least 10% difference to hold a copyright. Your poor conception to call those who believe in the KJV are not true believers, considering many of the great preachers (Whitefield, Wesley, Finney, Spurgeon, Edwards, Tozer, Ravenhill, et al) are heretics since they had the KJV and they believed it was the true Word of God. Lest I forget the NIV scholars, who felt they needed to adapt to the "every man crowd" by creating a non-gender Bible in 2011. (Didn't go well but I don't believe they won't try again.) The other factor is that almost all of the modern Bibles come from the GNT created by Westcott and Hort, who were occultists who hated the Textus Receptus and the KJB. Since we don't have any originals, no one can prove their translation is perfect and I doubt any linguist, if they were found, can make them perfect between languages. Considering the effort the KJV scholars put in and the time consumed to make sure it was the best that can be offered, I will take the KJV over the numerous ones today. I am not saying the scholars are not worthy today to create a "better translation." I am not saying their intent is wrong, either. It should be bothersome that every one is saying the previous translation is not good hence, the need to create a new modern version. When will this stop? When will modern scholars say and agree one translation is the best over all others? Can they all come to one place in one accord? Too many differences in doctrine to make that happen.
